Section 5 doesn’t just target terrorists or war criminals. It reclassifies civil denaturalization as a top enforcement priority and lowers the threshold for stripping citizenship to a civil standard—preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That turns a foundational right into something that can be revoked by administrative discretion rather than due process.
The language—“national security threats,” “terrorism,” “serious crimes”—is intentionally vague. And vague legal categories have a long history of being stretched to fit political needs. We’ve seen this before: denaturalization used against labor organizers, dissidents, immigrants whose beliefs were out of step with the government’s agenda. Once normalized, it doesn’t stay confined to the extreme cases.
If you trust the state to wield this power fairly, ask yourself which administration you’re willing to hand it to next. Because powers created in the name of security are almost always repurposed—and rarely surrendered. This isn’t about protecting citizenship. It’s about redefining it as conditional.
Adding to your list of citizenship targeted for reconsideration is the birthright provision of the 14th Amendment, which right to citizenship couldn't be stated any more plainly in the 1868 constitutional text. This constitutional right is now under direct attack by the current administration and is one which our Supreme Court also appears willing to reconsider.
This obsession with holding immigrants to the most rigorous application of citizenship law is brought to you by a president who is the grandson of a German immigrant (Friedrich Trumpf)
who dodged his German military obligation, lost his German citizenship and was deported to the USA. In 1892 he became a naturalized US Citizen. Of course, our current Trump would not be allowed continued citizenship himself, based on his extensive criminal record, under the rules he now enforces on other more recent immigrants.
Interestingly, apparently attempting to sweep aside the unwholesome record of his father's US entry, Donald's father, Fred, claimed his father (Friedrich) was an emigrant from Sweden. In his 1987 autobiography, Donald repeated this same claim. Friedrich was born and raised in Kallstadt, Germany. His son claimed his ancestry from Karlstad, Sweden. To Donald's obvious embarrassment, recently the German Chancellor, in a White House meeting, presented Donald a framed copy of Friedrich's German birth certificate.
WOW....would have loved to see the framed copy of Friedrich's (Trump's grandfather) German birth certificate given to Trump in that White House meeting!!!!! And so well stated that according to the citizenship qualifications, Trump would not be a citizen today!
To add to James' article here regarding what this administration is doing to the 14th Amendment ...... Here's a lesson on the Dred Scott Decision that was overturned by the 13th and 14th Amendments (which now seem to be jeopardy).
James B. Greenberg’s recent post, “Citizenship on Trial,” is a masterclass in fear-mongering and selective outrage. From likening lawful denaturalization to Nazi Germany to framing immigration enforcement as an assault on democracy, his piece ignores the actual purpose — and moral necessity — of protecting American citizenship.
Equating America’s laws with Nazi atrocities is offensive and dishonest. Greenberg repeatedly hints that denaturalization efforts today echo the Nazi regime’s stripping of citizenship from Jews in 1935. That’s an outrageous stretch. The Nazi state targeted innocent people purely on race, setting the stage for genocide. By contrast, the United States is enforcing laws against individuals who concealed crimes like child pornography, terrorism, violent felonies, and fraud to game their way into citizenship. Drawing a moral parallel between the United States defending its citizenship rolls and a genocidal dictatorship is not only historically illiterate — it’s an insult to the victims of true totalitarian horror.
Citizenship is a privilege that must be protected — not an unconditional entitlement. Our Founders envisioned a nation of citizens loyal to the Constitution and the rule of law. Naturalization has always required meeting strict standards. If someone lied, hid serious crimes, or later committed heinous acts that directly undermine our social contract, why should they keep the citizenship they obtained under false pretenses? America doesn’t owe citizenship to predators or those who deceive their way into our family. Citizenship is sacred. It demands allegiance and honesty — and yes, accountability.
Denaturalization is lawful, limited, and essential for national security. Greenberg presents it as if any naturalized citizen might suddenly lose citizenship for “dissent” or “political beliefs.” That’s simply false. The DOJ memo he cites clearly prioritizes denaturalization where there’s legal cause: terrorism ties, organized crime, fraud, or undisclosed serious felonies. The fact these cases proceed in civil court doesn’t make them nefarious — that’s because citizenship is an administrative legal status, not a criminal penalty. Due process still applies. Courts must find the government proved its case. This is nothing like mass arbitrary denationalization; it is targeted legal recourse against proven deceit or dangerous conduct.
Greenberg ignores the victims these criminals created. He laments the “chilling effect” on speech but says nothing about the actual chilling effect violent criminals, gang members, or predators have on innocent American communities. Should we let people who trafficked children, financed terror, or infiltrated under false identities remain citizens simply to avoid bruising progressive sensitivities? Where is the concern for the American families devastated by the very criminals who manipulated our immigration system?
America has every right, even duty, to maintain the integrity of citizenship. Our Constitution isn’t just a permission slip for anyone, regardless of conduct, to claim permanent membership. It’s a covenant. When naturalized citizens violate its principles so severely, hiding past atrocities, joining terror cells, or preying on our children, they break faith with the nation that welcomed them. Keeping citizenship meaningful sometimes means revoking it from those who betrayed it.
The real danger is ignoring these threats in favor of globalist “inclusion.” Under the Biden administration, we’ve already seen record illegal border crossings, terror watch list suspects apprehended at the border, and skyrocketing cartel violence. What Greenberg brands as a slide into authoritarianism is in fact a measured response to real security threats that Democrats too often dismiss in favor of open-borders ideology.
This has nothing to do with silencing dissent or punishing “disloyal speech.” There is zero evidence that anyone is losing citizenship over peaceful protest or voicing unpopular opinions. America’s long tradition of free speech, rooted in our Christian and constitutional heritage, remains robust. Denaturalization is about fraud and crime — not muzzling critics.
Here is the bottom line:
We love immigrants who come here legally, embrace our values, and enrich our communities. But citizenship is not a participation trophy. It is a solemn bond built on trust, truth, and allegiance. Those who deceive their way into it or betray it through violence and terror forfeit that bond. Protecting the integrity of citizenship is not tyranny, it’s justice. And it’s precisely what keeps America safe, sovereign, and free.
Nothing like a MAGAt to spew glittery MAGAtry, now, is there? The comparison with Nazi Germany is both apt and congruent. Trump is a dictator, is backed by those whose souls are too shriveled to tolerate freedom, and will lead us -- if allowed -- to disaster.
Thank you for illustrating exactly why honest debate is dying in this country. Instead of engaging with a single fact in my rebuttal, you resorted to childish name-calling (“MAGAt”) and lazy historical smears by tossing out “Nazi” comparisons. That’s not an argument — it’s emotional theater.
Calling Trump a dictator is the kind of hysterical hyperbole that cheapens real tyranny. In Nazi Germany, political opponents were thrown into camps, the press was fully controlled by the state, and dissent meant imprisonment or worse. Here, you’re freely posting your insults online without fear. That’s not what dictatorship looks like — that’s what robust free speech under the First Amendment looks like, the very freedom many on the left ironically wish to silence when it doesn’t align with their worldview.
I stand for a secure border, lawful immigration, and putting American families first — ideas rooted in protecting the blessings of liberty that our Constitution guarantees. If that sounds “too shriveled to tolerate freedom,” I’d argue you’ve confused chaos with freedom. True freedom requires law, order, and respect for the sovereignty that keeps us from dissolving into anarchy.
So we’ll keep defending our nation, our communities, and our Judeo-Christian values, with eyes wide open to the lessons of history — not distorted by cheap slogans, but grounded in reason and truth.
“Fair enough, we clearly see the world through very different lenses. But I’ll always welcome thoughtful debate over cheap shots. Maybe next round we’ll get there.”
Thanks for sending the official DOJ memo. My team has read it in full. It’s actually a perfect example of how our system is supposed to work — guided by law, with clear standards and due process protections.
This memo lays out criteria for civil denaturalization, which applies only to people who fraudulently obtained citizenship in the first place. That means individuals who lied about criminal pasts, terrorist ties, or other material facts that would have barred them from becoming Americans. It doesn’t target honest, law-abiding immigrants who became citizens through integrity and legal compliance.
What it does show is that the Department of Justice was, and still is, focused on ensuring U.S. citizenship isn’t a reward for fraud. That’s not tyranny. That’s basic integrity. America’s promise has always been open to those who come here legally and truthfully. Protecting the value of citizenship by rooting out deceit doesn’t make us authoritarian. It proves we actually take citizenship seriously, rather than treating it like a cheap participation trophy.
So thank you for sharing the link. It underlines precisely what I’ve argued all along. Sovereign nations have the right and the duty to enforce the rules around who becomes part of the national family. The existence of careful DOJ procedures, laid out in detail, is the opposite of a dictatorship. It’s exactly how a constitutional republic is meant to operate.
Section 5 doesn’t just target terrorists or war criminals. It reclassifies civil denaturalization as a top enforcement priority and lowers the threshold for stripping citizenship to a civil standard—preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That turns a foundational right into something that can be revoked by administrative discretion rather than due process.
The language—“national security threats,” “terrorism,” “serious crimes”—is intentionally vague. And vague legal categories have a long history of being stretched to fit political needs. We’ve seen this before: denaturalization used against labor organizers, dissidents, immigrants whose beliefs were out of step with the government’s agenda. Once normalized, it doesn’t stay confined to the extreme cases.
If you trust the state to wield this power fairly, ask yourself which administration you’re willing to hand it to next. Because powers created in the name of security are almost always repurposed—and rarely surrendered. This isn’t about protecting citizenship. It’s about redefining it as conditional.
Adding to your list of citizenship targeted for reconsideration is the birthright provision of the 14th Amendment, which right to citizenship couldn't be stated any more plainly in the 1868 constitutional text. This constitutional right is now under direct attack by the current administration and is one which our Supreme Court also appears willing to reconsider.
This obsession with holding immigrants to the most rigorous application of citizenship law is brought to you by a president who is the grandson of a German immigrant (Friedrich Trumpf)
who dodged his German military obligation, lost his German citizenship and was deported to the USA. In 1892 he became a naturalized US Citizen. Of course, our current Trump would not be allowed continued citizenship himself, based on his extensive criminal record, under the rules he now enforces on other more recent immigrants.
Interestingly, apparently attempting to sweep aside the unwholesome record of his father's US entry, Donald's father, Fred, claimed his father (Friedrich) was an emigrant from Sweden. In his 1987 autobiography, Donald repeated this same claim. Friedrich was born and raised in Kallstadt, Germany. His son claimed his ancestry from Karlstad, Sweden. To Donald's obvious embarrassment, recently the German Chancellor, in a White House meeting, presented Donald a framed copy of Friedrich's German birth certificate.
WOW....would have loved to see the framed copy of Friedrich's (Trump's grandfather) German birth certificate given to Trump in that White House meeting!!!!! And so well stated that according to the citizenship qualifications, Trump would not be a citizen today!
Thanks for your reply.
The presentation on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp1Xa7vgbc0
To add to James' article here regarding what this administration is doing to the 14th Amendment ...... Here's a lesson on the Dred Scott Decision that was overturned by the 13th and 14th Amendments (which now seem to be jeopardy).
https://substack.com/home/post/p-167577805
James B. Greenberg’s recent post, “Citizenship on Trial,” is a masterclass in fear-mongering and selective outrage. From likening lawful denaturalization to Nazi Germany to framing immigration enforcement as an assault on democracy, his piece ignores the actual purpose — and moral necessity — of protecting American citizenship.
Equating America’s laws with Nazi atrocities is offensive and dishonest. Greenberg repeatedly hints that denaturalization efforts today echo the Nazi regime’s stripping of citizenship from Jews in 1935. That’s an outrageous stretch. The Nazi state targeted innocent people purely on race, setting the stage for genocide. By contrast, the United States is enforcing laws against individuals who concealed crimes like child pornography, terrorism, violent felonies, and fraud to game their way into citizenship. Drawing a moral parallel between the United States defending its citizenship rolls and a genocidal dictatorship is not only historically illiterate — it’s an insult to the victims of true totalitarian horror.
Citizenship is a privilege that must be protected — not an unconditional entitlement. Our Founders envisioned a nation of citizens loyal to the Constitution and the rule of law. Naturalization has always required meeting strict standards. If someone lied, hid serious crimes, or later committed heinous acts that directly undermine our social contract, why should they keep the citizenship they obtained under false pretenses? America doesn’t owe citizenship to predators or those who deceive their way into our family. Citizenship is sacred. It demands allegiance and honesty — and yes, accountability.
Denaturalization is lawful, limited, and essential for national security. Greenberg presents it as if any naturalized citizen might suddenly lose citizenship for “dissent” or “political beliefs.” That’s simply false. The DOJ memo he cites clearly prioritizes denaturalization where there’s legal cause: terrorism ties, organized crime, fraud, or undisclosed serious felonies. The fact these cases proceed in civil court doesn’t make them nefarious — that’s because citizenship is an administrative legal status, not a criminal penalty. Due process still applies. Courts must find the government proved its case. This is nothing like mass arbitrary denationalization; it is targeted legal recourse against proven deceit or dangerous conduct.
Greenberg ignores the victims these criminals created. He laments the “chilling effect” on speech but says nothing about the actual chilling effect violent criminals, gang members, or predators have on innocent American communities. Should we let people who trafficked children, financed terror, or infiltrated under false identities remain citizens simply to avoid bruising progressive sensitivities? Where is the concern for the American families devastated by the very criminals who manipulated our immigration system?
America has every right, even duty, to maintain the integrity of citizenship. Our Constitution isn’t just a permission slip for anyone, regardless of conduct, to claim permanent membership. It’s a covenant. When naturalized citizens violate its principles so severely, hiding past atrocities, joining terror cells, or preying on our children, they break faith with the nation that welcomed them. Keeping citizenship meaningful sometimes means revoking it from those who betrayed it.
The real danger is ignoring these threats in favor of globalist “inclusion.” Under the Biden administration, we’ve already seen record illegal border crossings, terror watch list suspects apprehended at the border, and skyrocketing cartel violence. What Greenberg brands as a slide into authoritarianism is in fact a measured response to real security threats that Democrats too often dismiss in favor of open-borders ideology.
This has nothing to do with silencing dissent or punishing “disloyal speech.” There is zero evidence that anyone is losing citizenship over peaceful protest or voicing unpopular opinions. America’s long tradition of free speech, rooted in our Christian and constitutional heritage, remains robust. Denaturalization is about fraud and crime — not muzzling critics.
Here is the bottom line:
We love immigrants who come here legally, embrace our values, and enrich our communities. But citizenship is not a participation trophy. It is a solemn bond built on trust, truth, and allegiance. Those who deceive their way into it or betray it through violence and terror forfeit that bond. Protecting the integrity of citizenship is not tyranny, it’s justice. And it’s precisely what keeps America safe, sovereign, and free.
Nothing like a MAGAt to spew glittery MAGAtry, now, is there? The comparison with Nazi Germany is both apt and congruent. Trump is a dictator, is backed by those whose souls are too shriveled to tolerate freedom, and will lead us -- if allowed -- to disaster.
Thank you for illustrating exactly why honest debate is dying in this country. Instead of engaging with a single fact in my rebuttal, you resorted to childish name-calling (“MAGAt”) and lazy historical smears by tossing out “Nazi” comparisons. That’s not an argument — it’s emotional theater.
Calling Trump a dictator is the kind of hysterical hyperbole that cheapens real tyranny. In Nazi Germany, political opponents were thrown into camps, the press was fully controlled by the state, and dissent meant imprisonment or worse. Here, you’re freely posting your insults online without fear. That’s not what dictatorship looks like — that’s what robust free speech under the First Amendment looks like, the very freedom many on the left ironically wish to silence when it doesn’t align with their worldview.
I stand for a secure border, lawful immigration, and putting American families first — ideas rooted in protecting the blessings of liberty that our Constitution guarantees. If that sounds “too shriveled to tolerate freedom,” I’d argue you’ve confused chaos with freedom. True freedom requires law, order, and respect for the sovereignty that keeps us from dissolving into anarchy.
So we’ll keep defending our nation, our communities, and our Judeo-Christian values, with eyes wide open to the lessons of history — not distorted by cheap slogans, but grounded in reason and truth.
Wow -- you've got the phrase-book down, perfectly. Impressed, that's what I am.
“Fair enough, we clearly see the world through very different lenses. But I’ll always welcome thoughtful debate over cheap shots. Maybe next round we’ll get there.”
https://www.justice.gov/civil/media/1404046/dl?inline
Thanks for sending the official DOJ memo. My team has read it in full. It’s actually a perfect example of how our system is supposed to work — guided by law, with clear standards and due process protections.
This memo lays out criteria for civil denaturalization, which applies only to people who fraudulently obtained citizenship in the first place. That means individuals who lied about criminal pasts, terrorist ties, or other material facts that would have barred them from becoming Americans. It doesn’t target honest, law-abiding immigrants who became citizens through integrity and legal compliance.
What it does show is that the Department of Justice was, and still is, focused on ensuring U.S. citizenship isn’t a reward for fraud. That’s not tyranny. That’s basic integrity. America’s promise has always been open to those who come here legally and truthfully. Protecting the value of citizenship by rooting out deceit doesn’t make us authoritarian. It proves we actually take citizenship seriously, rather than treating it like a cheap participation trophy.
So thank you for sharing the link. It underlines precisely what I’ve argued all along. Sovereign nations have the right and the duty to enforce the rules around who becomes part of the national family. The existence of careful DOJ procedures, laid out in detail, is the opposite of a dictatorship. It’s exactly how a constitutional republic is meant to operate.